TODAY, IN THE EARLY STAGES of this new twenty-first century, the

Transcription

1 The Problem of the True and the False in Contemporary Shin Buddhist Studies: True Shin Buddhism and False Shin Buddhism 1 Takamaro Shigaraki Professor Emeritus Ryukoku University, Kyoto I. INTRODUCTION Issues Facing Shin Buddhist Studies Today TODAY, IN THE EARLY STAGES of this new twenty-first century, the walls of our national borders are gradually starting to fall. As we cross over these national boundaries, we find ourselves entering an age in which people, cultures and religions will all have to engage in a broad range of interchange. It has been my experience that, in the midst of this situation, a growing number of persons from outside of Japan are taking interest in Japanese Buddhism, and particularly in Shin Buddhism. In this new age, Shin Buddhism must be able to open itself up even more widely to the world. In spite of that, however, the doctrinal study of Shin Buddhism today remains mired in a conservative traditionalism. As long as it remains that way, it will never be able to mesh fully with the aspirations of the people of the world. The world is looking toward Shin Buddhism with heart-felt expectations. Yet, as long as it fails to attempt to become modernized and globalized, all of those hopes will certainly end in disappointment. This is what I have been feeling quite keenly, as of late. I would also like to ask this question of Shin Buddhism: Just what message does it have for contemporary society and how does it intend to respond to the myriad problems of today? Our twenty-first century scientific culture is now exposing a variety of contradictions within human life. Certainly, those aspects that fail to take account of the human intellect are being severely brought into question. In addition, an assortment of new themes have arisen, including bio-ethics and environmental ethics, as well as the problems of peace, human rights and other issues that are common to all humanity. In that sense, the present situation requires the involvement of religion within it. However, how on earth is Japanese Buddhism and we must include Shin Buddhism here going to be able to respond to 27

2 28 Pacific World the truly perplexing problems of this new twenty-first century? If I might offer my frank opinion, it is very uncertain whether it will likely be able to do so. If Shin Buddhism is unable to say anything in regard to the new problems found in today s globalized society, then inevitably it will find itself abandoned not only by persons from outside of Japan, but also eventually by the Japanese people themselves. Thus, Shin Buddhist Studies of today is directly faced with the problems of a new globalized society, and it is being asked how it will respond to them. More than anything else, I believe that Shin Buddhism of today and the future must cast off its traditional framework, which not only deviates from fundamental Buddhist principles, but also consists of convenient interpretations of them from institutional or sectarian levels. Shin Buddhism must be restored as a truly Buddhist school. As long as it fails to do so, it will be unable to respond to today s societal problems or to issues that are global or international in scope. A variety of recent experiences have convinced me of this. Posing the Problem of the True and the False in Contemporary Shin Buddhist Studies Contemporary Shin Buddhist Studies must clearly return to the fundamental purport of Shinran and to the true Buddhist teachings. However, prior to that Shin Buddhism must face the task of addressing the problem of what teachings it considers to be true and false. That is to say, we must be able to construct a clear theory for discerning and distinguishing true Shin Buddhism from false Shin Buddhism. Shinran had earlier made critical classifications vis-à-vis traditional Buddhist teachings and other Japanese religions of his era, distinguishing between true, provisional and false teachings. Today, the same kind of clear discernment of true, provisional, and false teachings must be made, in a way that accords with the actual situation that Shin Buddhism finds itself within. Since time will not permit me to take up this entire issue today, I will not touch upon the discussion of true versus provisional teachings. Instead, I would like simply to present a few of my thoughts regarding true versus false Shin Buddhism. As we consider the problem of the true and the false in Shin Buddhism, what basic standard should we apply in order to distinguish between true Shin Buddhism and false Shin Buddhism? The first consideration should be whether or not Shin Buddhism is clearly grounded in the logic of the East, or, that is, in the logic of Mahayana Buddhism. Secondly, we must consider whether Shin Buddhism is being interpreted through the logic of the Primal Vow, as it is set forth in the Muryøjukyø (the Larger Sutra of the Buddha of Immeasurable Life), the fundamental Pure Land sutra. Third,

3 Shigaraki: The Problem of the True and the False 29 we must take up the question of whether or not it correctly comprehends the fundamental purport of Shinran himself. Any criteria or logic that falls outside of these three considerations ought to be excluded. Yet, these three points are not very clear in today s understanding of Shin Buddhism. What is evident instead is the blending of Shin Buddhist thought with sectarian and institutional ideologies. It is here that an array of problems exists. Thus, a Shin Buddhism that correctly corresponds to the three theoretical points above is what we can call, true Shin Buddhism. Any form of Shin Buddhism that contravenes those principles must be called, false Shin Buddhism. It is not possible to avoid the fact that Shin Buddhism of today deviates in large part from those standards. I must firmly assert that, unless Shin Buddhism can return to its original state and take a correct stance with respect to these three principles, then, without question it will soon forfeit its societal and international position, and be reduced to just another Japanese folk religion. It is from this context that I would like to discuss the contents of a theory of the true and false in Shin Buddhism. Although there are many ideas that I would like to take up along this line, time is limited, and so I will address the problem of the distinction between true Shin Buddhism and false Shin Buddhism from the perspective of three questions. They are: 1. Is Amida Buddha an Entity or a Symbol? 2. Is Shinjin in Shin Buddhism Non-dualistic or Dualistic? 3. Is Shin Buddhism a Religion of Power or a Religion of Path? II. IS AMIDA BUDDHA AN ENTITY OR A SYMBOL? The Formation of the Pure Land Teachings I will first consider the question of whether Amida exists as a substantial entity, or a symbol. The conclusion that I will draw is that Amida Buddha exists as a symbol and that, as long as it is taken to be a substantial entity, there could be no true Shin Buddhism. Let us first take a brief look at the formation of the Pure Land Buddhist teachings. The notion of Amida Buddha can be identified with a stream of Mahayana Buddhist thought that arose around the first century of the Common Era some five hundred years after the death of Ûåkyamuni Buddha. On this question there remain many unresolved issues from an academic standpoint, although scholarly research has made numerous recent advances in this area. Speaking only from my own understanding, it appears that after his death Ûåkyamuni s body was cremated by his

4 30 Pacific World followers, who then divided the bones and ashes into eight parts and passed them on to other Buddhist followers. Stupas were then constructed to house the relics, which became the objects of Buddhist worship. With the passing of time, these stupas multiplied, and groups of Buddhist followers were formed, centering on such stupa worship. Undoubtedly, such groups must have included renunciant monks. In large part, however, the groups were made up of lay devotees, whose role it was to worship and maintain the stupas. Before long people began making pilgrimages to the stupas, and a belief system centered on stupa worship was born. Gradually, within this current of beliefs and practices, a form of Ûåkyamuni worship came to be promoted. It was based on the notion that, although Ûåkyamuni Buddha left this world at the age of eighty, his life and the enlightened content of his life eternally continue to guide beings. As a result of this, the concrete human image of Ûåkyamuni eventually disappeared, and the idea of his new Buddha-body Amida Buddha was born. This then developed into the worship of Amida Buddha. Amida Buddha is said to be the Buddha of immeasurable light (Amitåbha) and immeasurable life (Amitåyus). The basis for this idea rests in ideas and expressions in praise of Ûåkyamuni Buddha s virtues found in stories about the Buddha s life. According to them, Ûåkyamuni might have passed on from this world, but his true life is immeasurable, and his teaching his light has unlimited reach. Hence, he continues to guide beings even now. The concepts extolling the eternal nature of Ûåkyamuni s life (his vertical axis) and the unlimited breadth of his light (his horizontal axis) eventually developed into the idea of a new and independent Buddha-body. We can see, for instance, that Ûåkyamuni s beginnings as a prince overlaps with the narrative of the Larger Sutra, in which the Bodhisattva Dharmåkara is said to have originally been a king. Or, as another example, the Larger Sutra tells of fifty-three Buddhas that existed prior to Amida, starting with a Tathagata named D pamkara, which is identical to the name of the Buddha said to have been Ûåkyamuni s teacher in the distant past. In this way, we can see that on many points the Amida narrative must have been based on the life story of Ûåkyamuni. It is quite evident that the idea of Amida Buddha arose as an extension and sublimation of Ûåkyamuni worship. Amida Buddha as Symbol In that sense, it is possible for us to say that Amida Buddha is a symbolic expression of both Ûåkyamuni Buddha s life and enlightenment, as clarified by Ûåkyamuni s teaching. The word symbol contains a number of problems. However, I am now using it simply to refer to the use of analogy and other expressions in

5 Shigaraki: The Problem of the True and the False 31 the worldly dimension that use secular concepts to point to an ultimate, world-transcending truth. Ultimate truth or world-transcending existence is a reference to the content of the enlightenment realized by Ûåkyamuni and to the ultimate reality that he expounded. In Shin Buddhist terminology, it could also be said to refer to Amida Buddha s Primal Vow. This is the basic concept of the word symbol. A symbol represents a means or method of pointing to a worldtranscending, ultimate truth. Accordingly, since a symbol must always be expressed in an analogical and worldly manner, at some point also it must necessarily be negated. This, then, is the fundamental meaning of the word symbol. By negating worldly ideas even as it utilizes them, a symbol guides us to ultimacy, which transcends this world. Both life and light are worldly concepts. However, when both are expressed as immeasurable, they then point to that which transcends this world. The word life basically refers to a life spanning from birth to death. However, when expressed as immeasurable life, it could be said to transcend all worldly concepts. The phrase immeasurable light acts in the same way. Since the existence of light would illuminate the darkness, unlimited light would mean that no darkness could exist. That, however, would not be possible in this world. Here then is an attempt to talk about a worldtranscending ultimacy by negating the worldly concept of light, even while utilizing it. In Någårjuna s MahåprajñåpåramitopadeΩa (Commentary on the Mahåprajñåpåramitå S tra) 2 we find the phrase, Rely on the meaning, not on the words. Shinran cites this passage in the Chapter on Transformed Buddha-bodies and Lands of his Kyøgyøshø monrui (True Teaching, Practice and Realization). 3 Here Någårjuna provides an easily understandable illustration involving the moon and a finger. Since we human beings always look downward when we walk, he says, we do not see the beautiful, brilliant moon in the heavens. Someone then taps us on the shoulder and, with his finger, indicates that we should look up at the beautiful moon in the sky. This is the so-called illustration of the finger pointing to the moon. Någårjuna explains that the finger represents words, while the moon represents meaning. Meaning here refers to true meaning, first principle, or true essence. As we have seen above, it corresponds to the life of Ûåkyamuni and the content of his enlightenment. In this illustration, ultimate truth is represented by the moon. Since we are not able to grasp this first principle directly, we are directed toward it by words and language by the finger, or, symbol that points us toward the moon. Någårjuna urges us not to mistake the finger for the moon. He tells us not to confound words and meaning, that is, not to mistake the secular words that are used to point to ultimate truth for that truth itself. We are able to see the moon because of the finger. However, we should not look at

6 32 Pacific World the finger and think that it is the moon. This is the meaning of the phrase, Rely on the meaning, not on the words. Here, the topic of our discussion is the significance of symbols. The Buddha-body called Amida, that Buddha s Name, and all of the other words in the Sutra are all nothing more than fingers. None of them constitute the moon itself. The entire content of the Sutra and the teaching of Amida Buddha s Primal Vow are expressed symbolically so that we can know the moon itself. This idea can be more precisely explained by referring to the late Paul Tillich s understanding of symbols. Born in Germany, Tillich was a wellknown Protestant theologian who spent the latter part of his life in America. I would like to offer a summary of my own understanding of his splendid explanation of symbols. 4 For Tillich, first of all, a symbol is something that points to ultimate truth, which transcends the secular world. Thus, Amida Buddha, Amida s Name, all of the words in the sutras, as well as hell and the Pure Land are all symbolic expressions that point to an ultimate, world-transcending truth. Secondly, however, at the same time that a symbol points toward something, it also exists in a profound relationship with the thing itself. This is an important point, I believe. The finger points to the moon, and because of the finger we are able to look up to the moon for the first time. However, the finger is not simply a finger. It is because the finger is bathed in the light of the moon that, for the first time, the finger can engage in finger-activity, which is to point to the moon. The activity of the finger itself would not be able to exist in complete darkness. It is because the moon gives off light that the finger can exhibit finger-activity for the first time. In this sense, a symbol participates profoundly within ultimacy. It is none other than the self-expression of the ultimate. Tillich s third point is that we can encounter ultimate truth or world-transcending reality for the first time through symbols. Needless to say, were it not for symbols we would not be able to encounter ultimate truth or Amida Buddha. Fourth, Tillich says that a symbol reveals the deepest levels our own, individual spirit. A familiar example might be that, if we continuously worship before a Buddha image everyday of our life, eventually our eyes will be opened to the transcendent, ultimate reality behind the image. Yet, at the same time, our spirit (or, spirituality) gradually becomes cultivated through this process. These four points, I believe, reflect the fundamental meaning of symbols in Tillich s thought. Further, when discussing the transmission of symbols, Tillich states that a symbol must constantly be re-interpreted within every era and society. According to him, a symbol necessarily arises within a certain historical or societal context. The formation of the notion of Amida Buddha is a case in point. We do not know who produced the Larger Sutra. Although the Sutra indicates that it was expounded by Ûåkyamuni, he had

7 Shigaraki: The Problem of the True and the False 33 in fact died five hundred years prior to its development. However, even though we do not know who expounded the notion of Amida Buddha in the Larger Sutra, the Sutra had to have arisen within certain necessary historical and societal circumstances. I mentioned earlier that Amida worship probably arose out of circumstances involved in stupa worship. Tillich might say that, because it arose within a particular situation, Amida Buddha as a symbol could become extinct when those conditions greatly change. Thus, the length of a symbol s life could be extended and the symbol thus transmitted, depending on how it is re-interpreted in various era and societies. I am in complete agreement with this idea. If such a re-interpretation is not skillfully done, however, the symbol would not be transmitted, and it would fall into decline. It would be reduced to a mere shell of itself, stripped of content or purpose. It would become nothing more than a magical incantation, and would lose its life for all eternity. Is this not, in large measure, the current state of Japanese Buddhism today? Today, Buddhist images and paintings have become exhibition pieces, lined up for display at museums. Previously, life continuously flowed within those images, as they served to nurture the spirits of a great many persons. Today, however, they have been completely reduced to simple skeletons and show pieces. Not only that, the names of Buddhas or Buddhist scriptures originally pointed beings to ultimate truth. Yet now, more than just a few of them have, in various forms, become nothing more than magical incantations. In Shin Buddhism as well, a reinterpretation and re-transmission of its symbols must be courageously attempted and accomplished in the midst of the actual conditions of today s society. This kind of re-interpretation of symbols can be clearly seen in Shinran s thought. In the twelfth month of his eighty-sixth year, Shinran gave a sermon to Kenchi, a disciple who had gone to visit him at his temporary residence on Sanjø street in Kyoto. The topic of Shinran s Dharma message was jinen høni, in regard to which he explained, Amida Buddha fulfills the purpose of making us know the significance of jinen. 5 Here the word significance (yø in Japanese) indicates a state of affairs, aspect, situation, circumstances, and indication, as well as form and the inner reality of that form. The phrase fulfills the purpose (ryø in Japanese) refers to a factor or element, or, a method or means used for the purpose of accomplishing something. In the context of our present discussion, this refers to symbol. Thus, according to Shinran, Amida Buddha is the symbol that fulfills the purport of making us know the truth of jinen. In other terms, jinen refers to ultimate truth, which flows throughout heaven, earth, and the universe. This truth pervades all of human history. It is the

8 34 Pacific World universal principle that penetratingly includes both human beings and the entire universe. Ûåkyamuni awakened to, realized, and then taught this truth. Amida Buddha is the symbol the finger that enables us to know the significance of this truth. Some two thousand years ago, Någårjuna correctly expounded a Buddhist semiotic theory, and Shinran, nearly eight hundred years ago, further clarified this notion of symbols. In this way, Amida Buddha and the Name are nothing more than symbolic expressions; they are fingers pointing to the moon of ultimate, universal truth and reality. What is important for us is to experience and awaken to this ultimate truth, which lies on the far side of the moon. Yet, there is great question as to whether this is fully understood by traditional, institutional doctrinal studies. Erroneous Interpretations in Traditional Doctrinal Studies Today s traditional doctrinal studies give absolutely no consideration to this understanding of Amida Buddha as symbol, that is, as a finger pointing to the moon. As a result, proponents of traditional Shin Buddhist doctrinal studies have a tendency in large measure to apprehend the Name of Amida Buddha as a substantial entity. One example of this can be found in the concept that the Name and its substance are not separate (myøtai funi). This notion was originally discussed in a text entitled, Anjin ketsujøshø (On Attaining the Settled Mind), 6 a work of unknown authorship. According to current research in the area, the text is thought to have likely been associated with the Seizan branch of Jødosh. Kakunyo apparently long possessed his own copy of the text, and Rennyo is said to have compared the importance of the text to the unearthing of gold. As a result, the text has been accorded particular importance within the Hongwanji branch of Shin Buddhism as well. In the doctrine that the Name and its substance are not separate, the Name refers to a designation or appellation attached to a thing. Substance means the thing itself, or its actual state. Thus, the notion is that the appellation attached to a thing and the substance of the thing itself are not separate; rather, they constitute a single entity. I have a recollection that relates to this. Long ago, when I was still a student, a certain professor made the statement in a lecture on Shin Buddhist Studies that the Name of Amida Buddha is such that the Name and its substance are not separate. To explain what this meant he wrote in a large size the kanji character for fire on the blackboard. Touching it with his hand, he said, Gentlemen. Although I place my hand on this character it is not hot. I remember wondering what he was talking about. Next, he placed a piece of white chalk in his mouth and made the gesture of lighting a cigarette. No matter how many times I do this, it will not light. Finally, he stated, When we speak of names in this world, they are all simply

9 Shigaraki: The Problem of the True and the False 35 appellations and have no substance. Thus, the character for fire is not hot; you cannot light a cigarette with it. However, the Name of Amida is not like that. The Name, as it is, is perfectly endowed with substance. Thus, the Name and its substance are not separate. Even now I can clearly remember that professor s gestures. Yet, my thoughts then (and now) were that this kind of thinking turns Shin Buddhism into nothing more than a kind of belief in magical incantations. Yet, isn t this kind of idea still being preached in Shin Buddhist sermons even now? If that is so, then shinjin in Shin Buddhism has become nothing more than a belief in magic. It is also imprudent to try to understand, preach about, or propagate Shin Buddhism using ideas or terminology not seen anywhere in Shinran s works, but instead that are based on a classic book of unknown authorship and produced by another Buddhist school. That could not be considered Shin Buddhism. Moreover, the implication of the theory that the Name and its substance are not separate is that Amida Buddha exists as some kind of substantial entity. Hence, Amida s significance as a symbol becomes lost. Doctrinal studies of the Hongwanji branch have produced yet another concept that takes Amida Buddha to be a substantial entity. It is the theory that the Name is stamped (in the minds of beings) and arises as shinjin (myøgø ingen). This theory appeared during the Sangø wakuran conflict that occurred near the latter stages of the modern era. In the midst of the conflict, Daiei of the Aki province wrote a text entitled, Øchø jikidø kongø bei, 7 in which he criticized the theory of taking refuge in the three karmic modes of action for promoting a shinjin of self-power. Daiei asserted that shinjin, as set forth in Shin Buddhism, arises when the Name is stamped into the minds of sentient beings. According to this idea, the Buddha inscribes on his hand the Name, Namu Amida Butsu in reverse-image characters so as to be able to confer it on sentient beings. When the Buddha stamps it onto the white paper of sentient beings minds, shinjin arises in them. Thus, shinjin is said to appear when the Name is stamped onto their hearts and minds. According to this theory, shinjin in Shin Buddhism comes about when one receives the substantial entity of the Name, in which the Name and its substance are not separate. This idea that the Name is stamped in the mind of beings and arises as shinjin is still being discussed in books written by Shin Buddhist scholars and sold commercially today. It is frequently mentioned in the sermons of Shin Buddhist preachers. This is an inexcusable misinterpretation of the Shin Buddhist understanding that shinjin is to become free of self-power and entrust in Other Power. What can be done to counter these erroneous views? We must resolutely return to the starting point of Shinran s teaching, and seek to learn the true Shin Buddhist teaching.

10 36 Pacific World III. IS SHINJIN IN SHIN BUDDHISM NON-DUALISTIC OR DUALISTIC? The Original Meaning of Shinjin in Shin Buddhism Next, I would like to examine the question of whether shinjin in Shin Buddhism is non-dualistic or dualistic. My conclusion will be that shinjin in Shin Buddhism should be understood from the standpoint of the nondualism of Mahayana Buddhism. The original meaning of shinjin in Shin Buddhism emerges from the words pertaining to shinjin in both the passage of the Primal Vow and the passage on the fulfillment of the Primal Vow. The Vow passage presents it as entrust with joy (shingyø), while the fulfillment passage explains it as shinjin and joy (shinjin kangi). We can inquire into the original meaning of these phrases by referring to the Sanskrit version of the Larger Sutra. There, we find that the original meaning of shinjin is citta-prasåda. Citta indicates one s heart and mind, while prasåda means that joy arises in the mind when it becomes pure and clear. When the mind becomes clear, things can be seen within it. This state of mind has connections with the sphere of samådhi, in which our deluded passions are transformed. It refers to the supramundane realm, which transcends this world. Shinran certainly could not have known of these original Sanskrit terms. However, I believe that he fully understood their essential meaning. In the Chapter on Shinjin in his text, Kyøgyøshø monrui, Shinran explains that entrusting in joy means that one s mind is completely untainted by the hindrance of doubt. 8 Here, the hindrance of doubt is a reference to ignorance and deluded passions. Thus, since shinjin is not tainted or mixed with the hindrance of doubt it indicates a realm in which one has become freed of ignorance and where one s deluded passions have been transformed. The concept of the hindrance of doubt can be seen throughout Buddhist literature. For instance, one can find it explained in detail in introductory texts to Tendai thought. Since in his early years Shinran studied Tendai doctrine, I believe that he must have frequently come upon the term hindrance of doubt and fully understood its doctrinal intent. With this as his background, he later explained that entrusting in joy or shinjin is completely untainted by the hindrance of doubt. In a variety of senses, shinjin can be taken to mean that one has become free of ignorance and that deluded passions have been transformed. For instance, with this passage in his Shøshin nembutsuge (Hymn of True Shinjin and the Nembutsu), The darkness of our ignorance is already broken through, 9 Shinran offers us a clear description of the realm of shinjin. In explaining shinjin, Shinran uses phrases such as the wisdom of shinjin 10 and shinjin that is unsurpassed wisdom. 11 In a similar way, he states,

11 Shigaraki: The Problem of the True and the False 37 [K]now that since Amida s Vow is wisdom, the emergence of the mind of entrusting oneself to it is the arising of wisdom. 12 In this sense, the arising of shinjin is the arising of wisdom. By learning the Buddha-dharma, our ignorance and deluded passions are gradually transformed, and a new eye is opened. We come to see things anew. In other words, shinjin is the experience of awakening, which transcends the secular world. Hence, shinjin does not mean to believe in something in a dualistic or objectifying manner. The meaning of shinjin is always that of a non-dualistic, or, subjective state of mind. Originally, when shinjin was spoken of in simple terms, it was unavoidably described in relation to an object, such as having faith in Amida Buddha or entrusting in the Primal Vow. As a result, Shinran s Japanese-language works almost always express shinjin as being addressed toward some object. However, the Chapter on Shinjin elucidates shinjin of Shin Buddhism in terms of Mahayana logic. There, it should be noted, shinjin is clearly discussed in a manner that is non-dualistic, or, subjective in nature. To say that shinjin is the experience of awakening means, in a more concrete sense, that we awaken to the compassion of the Tathagata. Not only that, we also awaken to the depths and weight of our own karmic evil, which is illumined by that compassion. Awakening means that our eyes are opened in the direction of the light. Yet, at the same time, our eyes are also opened to the darkness in which we had been wandering up to this moment. The experience of awakening possesses this kind of two-fold directionality. This is also the structure of shinjin. Shinjin as the Experience of Awakening Let us discuss the structure of shinjin, and its inner reality, in a slightly more concrete way. The Eighteenth Vow of Amida Buddha (the Primal Vow) ends with this oath, (If they) should not be born there, may I not attain the supreme enlightenment. 13 Concretely, this means that our attainment of birth and Amida Buddha s attainment of supreme enlightenment come about simultaneously. This notion has been long described with the phrase, birth and supreme enlightenment are of one essence (øjø shøgaku ittai). According to the words of the Vow, the Buddha states, I will enable you to be born without fail. If you should fail to be born, I will never attain Buddhahood. Hence, the import of the Primal Vow is that as long as we are not saved, the Buddha Amida will not exist. This the problem implied by the idea that birth and perfect enlightenment are of one essence. This problem developed into a major theme in Shin Buddhist doctrinal studies from the Tokugawa period on.

12 38 Pacific World How is this problem interpreted in traditional doctrinal studies? A number of other issues are also involved here, but basically most of the approaches have made a dualistic distinction between our attainment of birth and the Buddha s attainment of supreme enlightenment. Even today, many persons hold to this understanding. For instance, later in the Sutra, it states, Since he attained Buddhahood, about ten kalpas have passed. 14 According to this, Amida had already become a Buddha ten kalpas ago in the distant past. Traditionally, this has been interpreted to mean that Amida has already become a Buddha, at a time prior to our attainment of birth. In his Jødo wasan (Hymns on the Pure Land), however, Shinran comments on this Sutra passage with this phrase, But he seems a Buddha more ancient than kalpas countless as particles. 15 In other words, for Shinran, the existence of Amida Buddha the Buddha of Immeasurable Life originally began in the beginningless past. This would imply that Amida Buddha is eternally coming toward the secular world and manifesting itself in that world. As a consequence, Amida Buddha has no existence outside of our own subjectivity, or, our own shinjin. However, in traditional doctrinal studies this problem has been separated dualistically into questions of logic and fact. Amida Buddha s prior attainment of supreme enlightenment ten kalpas ago in the distant past is said to establish the logic of the possibility of birth. On the other hand, our remaining in the world of delusion without actually attaining birth is an issue of fact. Hence, the difference between logic and fact is likened to the difference between the existence of medicine and our taking of it. Amida Buddha s attainment of supreme enlightenment means that the logic through which sentient beings can attain birth has been fulfilled. The medicine that will enable us to attain birth has been created. If we should take this medicine our illness would be cured without fail. That is, we would be able to attain birth. Thus, according to traditional Shin Buddhist doctrinal studies, the medicine of our path to birth has been created with Amida s attainment of supreme enlightenment. Thus, in effect, his work is over. What is said to remain is an issue of fact: Will we take the medicine or not? Will we walk the path or not? What remains is the problem of this self. Our task is to answer the question of whether to take this medicine that has been given to us already that is, whether to progress along this path to birth. Thus, it is said, the supremely enlightened Amida Buddha calls to us from the Pure Land, Come here! Come here! What then is essential is that, in response to that voice, we immediately accept without doubt the medicine of the perfected, six-character Name.

13 Shigaraki: The Problem of the True and the False 39 However, is this really the purport of the Primal Vow? The passage of the Primal Vow reveals, in contrast, the truth that birth and supreme enlightenment are of one essence. That is, there is no Buddha apart from me; there is no me apart from the Buddha. This self and Amida Buddha, as well as our attainment of birth and Amida s attainment of supreme enlightenment are identical of one essence. This theory of simultaneous arising is a fundamental principle of Mahayana Buddhism. Accordingly, it is also the truth of Amida Buddha s Primal Vow. Yet, in traditional doctrinal studies the idea of one essence is separated out in a completely dualistic and objectifying manner. This is how Amida Buddha is grasped in the traditional doctrinal studies of the Hongwanji branch of Shin Buddhism. On the other hand, the doctrinal studies of the Hongwanji branch also discuss the notion of innumerable attainments of enlightenment (saku saku jøbutsu). In this case, the one essence of birth and supreme enlightenment is apprehended subjectively. The idea is that an individual Dharmåkara Bodhisattva becomes manifest for each individual sentient being. That is to say, an individual Dharmåkara Bodhisattva attains enlightenment in correspondence with an individual person s attainment of birth. Thus, innumerable Dharmåkaras are unendingly attaining Buddhahood. This is the meaning of innumerable attainments of enlightenment. We can fully appreciate the fact that this interpretation seeks to grasp the problem in a subjective way. However, we must also recognize that this interpretation is an abstract one, which is removed from each individual s subjective experience of shinjin. In sum, the issue essentially comes down to this: Unless I attain birth, Amida Buddha will not exist for me. Shin Buddhism teaches that Amida Buddha exists definitively for the first time in the present moment and for this self only in identity with the experience of awakening, which is the arising of shinjin. To say otherwise to believe that Amida Buddha already exists somewhere, to ponder over it and engage in a dualistic search for an objectified Amida, and finally to accept that the Buddha must exist somewhere this is not shinjin as taught in Shin Buddhism. It is not that, since Amida Buddha exists somewhere, we must believe in Amida. Rather, it is that, within our experience of shinjin, Amida Buddha reveals itself and becomes certain to us. Guided by Shinran s teachings and single-heartedly saying the nembutsu within this life of nembutsu and in the continuation and deepening of the Buddhist path that it entails we will eventually come to realize shinjin as the experience of awakening. In shinjin, for the first time Amida Buddha comes to exist indisputably for us. It is in the experience of shinjin that we can definitively know the existence of both hell and the Pure Land.

14 40 Pacific World Erroneous Interpretations in Traditional Doctrinal Studies However, this sense that shinjin is a non-dualistic and subjective experience of awakening is completely missing in the interpretations of shinjin found in traditional Shin Buddhist doctrinal studies. In its place, we find interpretations that are both dualistic and objectifying in nature. Such erroneous interpretations clearly began with Kakunyo s approach to Shin Buddhism. In his youth Kakunyo had studied with the Seizan branch of the Jødosh. As a result, his understanding of Shin Buddhism deeply reflected the hues of the dualistic Seizan doctrines. This included his understanding of shinjin. Kakunyo asserted that the meaning of shinjin was to take refuge and submit to or take refuge and rely upon the Buddha. That is, for him it meant that one must wholeheartedly take refuge in Amida Buddha. Furthermore, he stated that it was necessary to have as a mediator a good teacher who was a member of Shinran s blood lineage. This good teacher, he maintained, would function essentially as a living Buddha or as the official representative of the Tathagata. By taking refuge in the good teacher in this way, one would be able to take refuge in and submit to or take refuge in and rely upon Amida Buddha. Kakunyo s eldest son, Zonkaku, also offered various explanations of Shin Buddhist doctrine in his voluminous writings. Like his father, he had also been influenced by the teachings of the Seizan branch of Jødosh. Thus, he identified shinjin with a person s taking of refuge in the Buddha. In his text, Rokuyøshø (Notes on the Essence of the Six-fascicle Work) 16, Zonkaku s explication of the significance of shinjin appears to be based on general Buddhist literature, such as commentaries on the Abhidharma-koΩa and the Ch êng-wei-shih-lun. In fact, however, Zonkaku is simply attempting to draw meaning from mere fragments of the literature, often applying his own, forced readings upon them. This technique leads him to assert that the meaning of shinjin is really to enjoy hearing the Buddha-dharma (aigyø). In this way, not long after Shinran s death shinjin came to be interpreted in a completely dualistic or objective sense, as the mind that takes refuge and submits to or the mind is able to take refuge in the Buddha. From this point on, distortions in the understanding of shinjin in Shin Buddhism began to take place. By Rennyo s time this sort of dualistic understanding of shinjin had come to be thoroughly accepted. This could be seen in the expression, I entrust in the Buddha to save me (tasuketamae to tanomu). From an early age, Rennyo took the position that the Japanese word tanomu (entrust or rely) was an appropriate translation for the word, shinjin, and in his later years he used the word extensively. For instance, he states in a Letter,

15 Shigaraki: The Problem of the True and the False 41 [W]hen we have the thought of clinging firmly to Amida Buddha s sleeve without calculation and entrusting ourselves to the Buddha to save us in the life-to-come, the Amida Tathagata will deeply rejoice. 17 Clearly, shinjin is understood here to be a state of mind that is in a dualistic or objectifying relationship with Amida. We are able to see that this was in reality something completely foreign to the original sense of shinjin that of cittaprasåda as well as shinjin in the sense of Shinran s expression that, the emergence of the mind of entrusting oneself to it is the arising of wisdom. 18 Next, let us take a look historically at the interpretations of shinjin made within the doctrinal studies in the Hongwanji branch since the Tokugawa period. On the whole, they can be separated into two schools of thought: the K ge school and the Sekisen school. According to Zenjø, a representative scholar of the K ge school, shinjin is to rely upon and put one s trust in the Name. This was typical of the dualistic interpretations of shinjin. In contrast, Søe, a Sekisen scholar, stated that shinjin means that the mind becomes pure and clear. That is the nature of shinjin. This view represented an excellent understanding of Shinran s purport the original meaning of shinjin in Shin Buddhism. Yet, the Hongwanji branch labeled Søe s doctrine as heterodoxy, and completely rejected it. The dualistic K ge school became mainstream of Hongwanji thought, and remains so even today. In sum, the prevailing understanding of shinjin that is found in the Hongwanji branch of Shin Buddhism was inherited from Kakunyo and Rennyo. According to this view, the sole practice in Shin Buddhism is the Name. Shinjin means that one takes refuge in, abides by and receives the Name of Dharmic-substance. In the Øtani branch of Shin Buddhism, by contrast, the understanding of shinjin was inherited from Zonkaku. In this view, the practice of Shin Buddhism is to say the nembutsu. Shinjin refers to one s active reliance on the practice of the nembutsu. Despite their apparent differences, the doctrinal interpretations in both branches essentially amount to nothing more than dualistic or objectifying understandings of shinjin. Needless to say, then, our task today is to correctly study the significance of shinjin as expressed in the passage of the Primal Vow in the Larger Sutra, as well as the significance of shinjin in Shinran s thought. IV. IS SHIN BUDDHISM A RELIGION OF POWER OR A RELIGION OF PATH? The Fundamental Standpoint of Buddhism Next, I would like to address the issue of whether Shin Buddhism is a religion of power, or a religion of path. My conclusion is that Shin Bud-

16 42 Pacific World dhism corresponds to the latter. It constitutes a religion of path and is not concerned with power. The fundamental principle of Ûåkyamuni Buddha s teaching can be seen in the contents of his first sermon the first turning of the Dharma Wheel after his attainment of enlightenment. It was there that he expounded the teaching of the Middle Path. After his birth as a prince, Ûåkyamuni had spent long years in pursuit of pleasure within his castle walls. However, he came to have doubts about this way of life, and so he left his kingdom and assumed the life of a renunciant. For the next six years he utterly abused himself physically, as he undertook austere practices in the hope of achieving spiritual independence. However, he later engaged in a critical reconsideration of the two extreme paths of pleasure and hardship. As a result, he changed his mind and sat beneath a bodhi tree, there deeply pondering the fundamental truths of the universe and human existence. He became aware that both a life in pursuit of pleasure and a life of complete austerity were erroneous. Not only was it wrong to live a life solely directed by instinct or desires, but it was also wrong to live by abusing oneself physically in order to negate one s desires. He then awakened to the truth that the genuine path for human life was the Middle Path a path of neither pleasure nor pain. This Middle Path did not simply lie between pleasure and pain. Instead, the paths of both pleasure and pain were to be rejected. With the rejection of both pleasure and pain, one would come to live one s life based on the negation of both. Ûåkyamuni taught that it was here that a true and real human life could come about. In later years, this teaching of the Middle Path underwent numerous changes and developments, becoming, as it were, the tenet a number of Buddhist schools. In this sense, the way of life that Shinran exemplified that of being neither a monk nor one in worldly life, 19 or, as I wish to phrase it, neither true nor worldly developed out of Ûåkyamuni s teaching of the Middle Path. What this means is that the life of a nembutsu follower is one of pain and aspiration. To live within shinjin in Shin Buddhism means that our life is neither true nor worldly. As we reflect on the present condition of our life lived in disregard of the Buddhadharma we cannot help but feel a sense of pain. Yet, at the same time, as we reflect on the present condition of our life submerged and buried in the secular world we constantly aspire to be able to draw nearer to the Buddha-dharma. This way of life, which Shinran described as neither priest nor one in worldly life, is based on the Middle Path, which Ûåkyamuni expounded in the first turning of the Dharma Wheel. In that first sermon Ûåkyamuni Buddha then went on to give a concrete explication of the Middle Path through his teaching of the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path. This represents, fundamentally, both a challenge to us and an instruction on how we could live a genuine

17 Shigaraki: The Problem of the True and the False 43 human life. How could we, in our present state of being, come to realize our ideal self the self that we ought to be? Ûåkyamuni Buddha revealed to us the way the path that would lead to our attainment of enlightenment. By inheriting this teaching as well, Shin Buddhism sets out a path upon which we can attain Buddhahood. This was Shinran s purport when he stated that, Attaining Buddhahood through the nembutsu is the true essence of the Pure Land Way. 20 [O]ne who entrusts oneself to the Primal Vow and says the nembutsu attains Buddhahood. 21 It is in this sense that we can say that Shin Buddhism is a religion of path. The path of human fulfillment, or, human maturation, in which one singleheartedly says the nembutsu, and with that nembutsu gradually casts off the skin of one s old self and realizes true growth as a human being this is the path of Shin Buddhism. On this path, this not-so-human self becomes, little-by-little, a bit more human through the nembutsu. Directing our sight to the Buddha and the far-off Pure Land, we come to realize true human growth. This is the path of Shin Buddhism, the true essence of the Pure Land Way. Shin Buddhism is the Teaching of Attaining Buddhahood Through the Nembutsu The Shin Buddhist path for the attainment of enlightenment is the path of the nembutsu. On this path, one says the nembutsu and realizes shinjin. In today s Shin Buddhist doctrinal studies, however, this sense of the nembutsu has often been omitted. I was once shocked to hear of the distress felt by a Shin Buddhist follower, who had been rebuked by a priest in this way, When you recite the nembutsu, that is not the practice of the nembutsu! This is a shocking statement, since the Shin Buddhism teaches us first and foremost to say the nembutsu. A Shin Buddhist path that neglects the nembutsu would be absolutely meaningless. It is through the recitation of the nembutsu that the nembutsu opens up as shinjin. In other words, by saying the nembutsu one realizes shinjin. The nembutsu is the process and shinjin is the goal. However, at the same time, there can be no shinjin aside from the nembutsu. This is the notion of the oneness of practice and shinjin (gyøshin ichinyo), to which Shinran was referring when he said,

18 44 Pacific World True and real shinjin is unfailingly accompanied by [saying] the Name. [Saying] the Name, however, is not necessarily accompanied by shinjin that is the power of the Vow. 22 [T]here is no nembutsu separate from shinjin.... There is no shinjin separate from nembutsu Døgen said essentially the same thing in this regard. In Døgen s thought one realizes enlightenment through the practice of sitting meditation. Yet, although practice is the process and enlightenment is the goal, at the same time he comprehended that, practice and enlightenment are identical (sh shø ittø). We can see that the structure of the path to enlightenment is the same for both the nembutsu and zazen. Since shinjin is realized in the true practice of the nembutsu, Shinran also states, To entrust oneself to the nembutsu is to already have become a person who realizes wisdom and will attain Buddhahood. 24 Note that Shinran does not say, one becomes a Buddha. Instead, he uses the phrase, becomes one who will attain Buddhahood. Both Døgen and Nichiren asserted, in contrast, that one becomes a Buddha in this body and in this world. Although Døgen died at the age of fifty-two, he is said to have already become a Buddha. On the other hand, Shinran lived until he was ninety, but he was unable to attain Buddhahood in this life. Here we can make an inference as to the severity of Shinran s own critical self-scrutiny. He could become a person who will become a Buddha, but he never spoke of becoming a Buddha. We can also sense the thoroughness of Shinran s thought. However, be that as it may, he also taught us that we can realize true human growth through the nembutsu. When this foolish, inferior human being says the nembutsu, we grow, little-by-little, to be a somewhat better human being. This is the meaning of shinjin. However, this is not what the traditional doctrinal studies say. Rather, what we are told is that, upon the attainment of shinjin, all that happens is that our birth in the life-to-come becomes clear. Hence, our human nature does not change at all. Or, we are told that we attain enlightenment only upon birth in the Pure Land after death. But that is not the Shin Buddhism that Shinran taught. What he made clear was that, as we say the nembutsu, we come to be nurtured positively by that nembutsu, even in our current state. Little-by-little, we individual human beings each cast off the skin of our old self and realize true human growth. Shinran addresses this in his text, Gutokushø (Gutoku s Notes), where he gives the following explanation of shinjin, based on the passage on the fulfillment of the Eighteenth Vow of the Larger Sutra,